Katie has a list of real numbers such that the sum of the numbers on her list is equal to the sum of the squares of the numbers on her list. Compute the largest possible value of the arithmetic mean of her numbers.
This section requires Javascript.
You are seeing this because something didn't load right. We suggest you, (a) try
refreshing the page, (b) enabling javascript if it is disabled on your browser and,
finally, (c)
loading the
non-javascript version of this page
. We're sorry about the hassle.
The list may contain the following numbers : ( 0 , 0 , 0 , . . . . ) , ( 0 , 1 ) , ( 0 , 0 , 1 ) , . . . ( 0 , 0 , 0 , . . . . , 1 ) , ( 1 , 1 ) , ( 0 , 1 , 1 ) , . . . . . Of these, the list ( 1 , 1 ) has the largest mean, which is 1 .
How do you know that at most 2 of the elements in this list can be 1 and the others are 0?
Log in to reply
Yes, I am also confused. And BTW, can we apply AM GM here? Or something related?
Log in to reply
No. The numbers are not necessarily positive.
Log in to reply
@Pi Han Goh – Right! What if assume cases and in the first case the numbers are real. But that would also be vague again. Thanks! P.S. This made we wonder whether for two negative numbers, the AM GM flips the inequality:
2 x + y ≤ x y
Log in to reply
@Mahdi Raza – let x = -X, y = -Y, you got two positive numbers.
Log in to reply
@Pi Han Goh – @Mahdi Raza - I think the key is to split the problem into two parts. First, show that for a maximum, all the numbers on the list need to be the same. Second, use that to simplify and solve the original question.
I've posted a couple of ways to do the first part (which is the interesting bit), but I'm sure you could find others. AM-GM is a good intuition because it leads directly to the conclusion that all the numbers are equal, but as per your discussion with @Pi Han Goh , you'll need to find positive numbers somewhere.
Problem Loading...
Note Loading...
Set Loading...
Let the numbers on Katie's list be x 1 , ⋯ , x n . We wish to maximise x = n 1 ∑ x i subject to the condition ∑ x i 2 − x i = 0 .
Solution 1: Lagrange multipliers
For a fixed positive integer n , let F ( x 1 , ⋯ , x n , L ) = n 1 ∑ x i + n L ∑ x i 2 − x i
The maximum of x subject to the constraint is achieved when each of the partial derivatives of F is zero. For each i , we have ∂ x i ∂ F = n 1 + n L ( 2 x i − 1 ) = 0
The trick here is to note that this means (for an extremum) all of the x i must be equal - in fact, x i = x for each i . Hence x 2 − x = 0 , so x = 0 or x = 1 .
Solution 2: Geometry
The condition can be rewritten as ∑ ( x i − 2 1 ) 2 = 4 n . This is the equation of an n dimensional sphere, S c centred at ( 2 1 , 2 1 , ⋯ , 2 1 ) with radius 4 n .
Due to the condition, maximising the arithmetic mean of the values is the same as maximising ∑ x i 2 = r 2 . This is also an n dimensional sphere, S , centred at O .
The point ( x 1 , ⋯ , x n ) lies on both spheres. In order to maximise r , the spheres must be tangent to each other ( S c is inside S ). The point of tangency must lie on the line joining their centres; hence again we find all the x i are equal, and the rest of the derivation is as in solution 1.